Welcome language on drones, terror

Published 3:57 pm, Wednesday, May 29, 2013

There is a paradox in ending or winding down war — in Iraq and Afghanistan — but escalating the use of more impersonal warfare through the use of drones.

People die in both cases. Drones have also become an issue, however, because U.S. citizens have been targeted — essentially executed without due process.

President Obama last week, in a much anticipated address on national security, signaled a willingness to give such strikes more oversight and, by signing a directive that raises the bar on when they can be used, to lessen their use altogether. The military, not the CIA, will now direct most drone use.

All these decisions are welcome, albeit overdue. In particular, Congress should take the president's suggestion that it set up an independent court to review drone targets and run with it. This court could be patterned after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees eavesdropping on American soil.

We don't question the need for drones. The war on terror requires precision. But their overuse or bad use can make more enemies than they kill, particularly when innocent civilians are involved. And in the case of targeting U.S. citizens — at least four known cases — serious constitutional questions arise, which is why oversight is needed.

Particularly welcome were the president's remarks that even the war on terror, “like all wars, must end.” This doesn't mean the threat will ever go completely away, but his comments acknowledge that the country and the liberties its citizens take for granted are ill served by a constant war footing.

Drones, their uses limited to targets posing a “continuing and imminent threat,” as Obama said, are necessary. We hope they won't be some day.